Mats Rosenkranz vs Marek Gengel — Tiburon CH Round of 32

Tiburon CH · CHALLENGER · Round of 32
GER
Mats Rosenkranz
#358ATP
1454ELO
1424Hard ELO
27 yrs · 193 cm · Left-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LWWLWLWWLW
2 — 0
Sets
Monday, 29 September 2025
hard
Marek Gengel
CZE
Marek Gengel
#373ATP
1411ELO
1377Hard ELO
30 yrs · 185 cm · Right-handed
Last 10 · pre-match
LLWWWWLWWW
Rosenkranz M.
7-6 6-2
Gengel M.
Rosenkranz M.
7762
Gengel M.
6420

Mats Rosenkranz defeated Marek Gengel 7-6 6-2 in the Tiburon CH round of 32 on hard.

Key context

Head to head

No previous meetings on record.

Serve vs return

This season
Rosenkranz M.serving83% hold

wins 65% of points on serve vs Gengel M.

Gengel M.serving80% hold

wins 63% of points on serve vs Rosenkranz M.

Even serve battle

Each player's serve crossed against the other's return, converted to expected hold of serve. Recent completed matches, ATP, WTA & Challenger. About

Statistics

This season
Rosenkranz M.Gengel M.
1st serve in·Even
60%
62%
1st serve points won·Even
74%
71%
2nd serve points won·Slight edge
51%
45%
Service points won·Even
65%
61%
Return points won·Even
37%
39%
Break points saved·Slight edge
66%
57%
Aces / match·Slight edge
6.4
5.4
Double faults / match·Even
3.1
3.1

Averages over each player's completed matches in the selected window (56 vs 58). ATP, WTA & Challenger.

Clutch

Under pressure
Rosenkranz M.Gengel M.
Clutch Rating·Clear edge
31
11
Break points saved·Dominant
86
35
Break points won·Slight edge
1
11
Deciding sets·Slight edge
64
53
Tiebreaks·Even
6
4

Performance in the biggest moments — break points, deciding sets and tiebreaks (0–100, higher is better). About

Umpiry Score

Pre-match
Rosenkranz M.
5.8
Slight disadvantageUmpiry Score
Gengel M.
5.6
Slight disadvantageUmpiry Score
Form & Matchup
5.6+47 Hard Elo edge
Surface ELO
4.4Hard Elo 1377
5.5Overall Elo 1454
ELO gap
4.5Overall Elo 1411
0.0No prior meetings
H2H
10.0
3.9
Surface form
2.0
0.0Lost last 2
Win streak
0.0Lost last 2
Fatigue & Travel
9.2
Minutes 14d
9.0
Prev. match
8.0
Context
5.0
Defending pts
5.0

The Umpiry Score combines match-context factors — matchup, form, fatigue, travel and motivation — into a single 0–10 score, updated daily. Read how it works.

Conditions

Court speed
Mediumbalanced pace
SlowFast
Final
Zheng M.[7]
Zink T.
6-46-4
Semi-finals
Zink T.
Shelbayh A.
6-36-4
Zheng M.[7]
Jodar R.
6-47-5
Quarter-finals
Zink T.
Banerjee S.
6-41-66-3
Shelbayh A.
Popko D.[6]
6-46-2
Jodar R.
Mejia N.[5]
6-06-2
Zheng M.[7]
Krueger M.
7-56-3
R16
Shelbayh A.
Perez A.
4-66-36-2
Popko D.[6]
Artnak B.
6-26-4
Mejia N.[5]
Rosenkranz M.
2-66-47-65
Banerjee S.
Hassan B.[4]
6-17-5
Zink T.
Monday J.[8]
6-46-3
Jodar R.
Pinnington Jones J.[3]
6-26-3
Zheng M.[7]
Wallin O.
6-46-1
Krueger M.
Cassone M.[2]
6-36-736-2
R32
Hassan B.[4]
Johns G.
Rybakov A.
Monday J.[8]
Jodar R.
Ilagan A.
6-33-66-1
Krueger M.
Masur D.
2-66-46-2
Popko D.[6]
Bondioli F.
6-25-76-2
Rosenkranz M.
Gengel M.
7-646-2
Banerjee S.
Sekulic P.
6-15-76-4
Shelbayh A.
Rodionov J.[1]
7-636-4
Cassone M.[2]
Bouzige M.
6-36-2
Wallin O.
Damm M.
2-67-656-3
Pinnington Jones J.[3]
Chan D.
6-36-3
Zheng M.[7]
Tarvet O.
6-46-3
Artnak B.
Tokuda R.
6-16-776-4
Perez A.
Svajda T.
6-46-4
Zink T.
Braswell M.
6-16-4
Mejia N.[5]
Martin A.
6-44-67-65